I was originally going to do a piece about this on my podcast, but after thinking about it I realised it may take took long so I am doing this blog entry instead.
First – the actual definition of a Cancel Culture is as follows;
“A cultural phenomenon in which some who are deemed to have acted or spoken in an unacceptable manner are ostracised, boycotted, or shunned.”
Now that quote does come from Wikipedia, but it is sourced from four pretty good sources. The Merriam Webster definition limits it to public figures on both sides and that’s not appropriate. That correction is primarily the reason for this blog entry.
So let’s look into it properly and I’m going to start with the cons. The cons are basically discrimination in it’s basic form – the ostracising and shunning of those who step outside what is the socially accepted norm. Now in the old days that definition was applied a lot wider than it is now. It ranges from sex discrimination where females were shut off from all employment except those that were deemed to be women’s work, like nursing and teaching. The latter though had a limitation – once you become a mother, that was your primary function. Stay at home – in other words. That – by definition – is a cancel culture.
It also applied to the LGBTIQ+ community. There were even laws against them existing – at one point it was classified as a mental disorder in order to enforce that social identification. And don’t even start me on the skin colour and the amount of ostracising and shunning that took place there! It was even applied to religion!
Then of course we come to the cancel culture in the disabled community – which of course I can talk about through experience. The restraints placed on us by society are a form of ostracising and shunning. Penalising us for being different (either physically or not). Insisting on stairs instead of ramps for those in wheelchairs is the most obvious example of a cancel culture. Social ostracising and shunning is the most most common issue for the Autistic community, and this leads to the inability to obtain or maintain a job.
The whole base of the cancel culture is in behaviour, and trying to dictate it and push it in a particular direction. Some directions are totally wrong and need to be shut off or adjusted as the case may be. And it’s for that reason that we now have discrimination laws in order to enforce that. They aren’t perfect however, as proven by the continuing issues in all areas even if they aren’t as pronounced as they used to be.
But it’s here that we come to the pros of the cancel culture. It comes in two forms – misinformation, and reverse discrimination.
Misinformation is the better example in terms of it’s simplicity. It’s why for example the government in Australia looked to slap restrictions on it in social media. The trouble was it was misunderstood and the result was that it was seen as a basic restraint on freedom of speech. The reality was that it was adding responsibility to it, but not enough people were listening. They basically demanded the right to lie, which is wrong. What is right is being called out on it and being ostracised and shunned as a result. Now in this case that is the right thing to do – unless the liar actually has something to prove that they aren’t lying. Honestly – I think the lack of that option is the reason why the proposed legislation fell down. I hope it will be attempted again at some point in the future.
The worst form of misinformation is political. I fight this constantly – the right wing of politics engages in a lot of the old cancel culture, and I get into it pointing out it’s faults as one should. It’s called political banter. It’s all one can do because there are many who can’t see their nose despite their face and won’t adjust where it can be done reasonably.
But there is also the most dangerous form of misinformation – health. I don’t call it the worst because the political side involves the important decision making in law. Health misinformation doesn’t. But it can cost lives and that’s why it’s more dangerous – especially when it comes to vaccines, whether it be the COVID-19 vaccine in particular or vaccines in general. It is even recognised by the law – section 48 of the Disability Discrimination Act where the unvaccinated can be discriminated against. Now I take the latter personally because one of the most blatant pieces of misinformation there lies in the claim that vaccines cause Autism. That is BS and there are 121 studies (last I checked and it was awhile ago now) that prove it. There may be a way to deal with that through a particular law change that I hope will be taken on and added this year. I am going to use it if so.
There is an aspect that takes in both combined – and that goes to the lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is partly what inspired me to talk about this on my podcast originally before bringing it here. The reason is a review on a forum of an interview that I was aware of but hadn’t bother to listen to myself – this was because of the two people involved; Vince Russo and Kellyanne Salter. Now most readers will say “Who?”. The ones who are pro wrestling fans will know the first name – a former writer and booker for WWE (WWF then), WCW and TNA. No one in the industry respects him because he didn’t really understand the business. He fluked a couple of things and got them right, but mostly he got it wrong and doesn’t have the guts to admit it. He is a bitter and twisted person. The other party is lesser known unless you follow the Australian scene. I know her because of my involvement and we used to be good friends – until I found out she was against the lockdowns, and consequently also supported the anti vaxxers specifically about COVID-19. She might not have opposed the vaccine herself, but by supporting those who were against it – that makes her a part of the problem anyway.
She went off about the cancel culture in her interview – this was about the loss of an offered contract with American promotion Ring of Honor prior to it being bought out at the end of 2021. Now I don’t know this for sure, but what I am about to say makes sense. The whole problem was Salter’s inability to get a green card in the US. That’s why immigration wouldn’t let her in. Ring of Honor tried to fight it, but gave up. I suspect I know why – American immigration knew about her online rhetoric about the responses to the pandemic and didn’t want another potential troublemaker in their country. And I say fair enough. They had enough problems in states like Michigan for example where they locked down and there were violent protests against it in 2020.
She tarnished her reputation with that and it’s why no one was listening when she made other allegations that may have got her support in any other circumstances, especially when it came to how females were treated in Australian wrestling. She brought that on herself and she retired from pro wrestling as a result. I have no sympathy.
Equally I have no sympathy for those who engage in reverse discrimination – taking discrimination rights well beyond the realms of equality. They cop it from the cancel culture and again it’s quite right. I even cancelled something myself as a result of it – Spectrum Labor. It is not right and goes against equal rights. I am of the view that reverse discrimination is the key to the hold backs in real equality and why it is taking so long to achieve it in all respects. I spoke about this on my podcast awhile back.
One of the battle plans of people in this battle on both sides is bullying. When one can’t shut down the other side, they bully instead. Now again there are two sides to this. The ones who bully originally are in the wrong. However the ones who bully in response to the bullying are not in the wrong – and I admit it. I’ve done it myself. I’m not proud of it of course, but there are times when one doesn’t have a choice – especially when there are no other options and that’s a problem in itself. I can avoid it if the line is crossed into defamation, and I’ve been successful in that area in terms of vindication in general. It hasn’t been perfect though and I could at this point give a very personal example, but I won’t because I don’t want to start it all over again – even though I didn’t start it to begin with.
Bullying happens usually when the law isn’t up to it when it comes to resolving the issue at hand in better ways. This is where the cancel culture shows it’s face on both sides – the right and the wrong. And it leads to an angry society. The balance isn’t there and only law can resolve that.
But this is something that popped up that I saw in social media – a saying that sums it all up pretty well.
“Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.”
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn said that. Freedom and equality can’t mix – and he was right. So as a consequence, total freedom is impossible. Those who are on the wrong side of the cancel culture want to cancel equality because it restrains the freedom they want. But the right side demands equality to provide more freedom than they would otherwise have. As I said – the balance isn’t there, and as long as the wrong side of the cancel culture continues on we’ll never get it.
So we need to fight the wrong side of the cancel culture and support the right side. The side of the fair go for all.
Who’s in?
Philip Gluyas 